Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:55:43 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com>, toolchain@FreeBSD.org, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org CURRENT" <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru>, FreeBSD Current <current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: GCC withdraw Message-ID: <DB45213A-B039-4BEA-B218-F1199BFC5E36@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5220B1F3.1030807@freebsd.org> References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com> <CAOFF%2BZ3vbOgMO7T-BKZnhKte6=rFoGcdYcft5kpAgNH2my1JKg@mail.gmail.com> <DC41B4BD-159A-408B-804A-0230F3E0E52B@FreeBSD.org> <201308291057.43027.jhb@freebsd.org> <8F836479-BC3A-4679-A7AA-3BCDD34AE6C5@FreeBSD.org> <52204746.2070900@freebsd.org> <ADADF693-B140-4C87-B464-9F139B31E7B5@FreeBSD.org> <5220B1F3.1030807@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 30 Aug 2013, at 15:53, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> = wrote: > So the real driver here is switching to libc++. Is there really no way > at all to use it with gcc? If, even with hacking, we could arrange = that > to work then it seems that all of our problems would go away. If we can make our g++ compile C++11 code, then we can compile libc++ = with g++. This support requires significant modifications to the parser = (it adds a second Turing-complete compile-time language, for one...) and = so retrofitting C++11 support to g++ 4.2.1 is not going to happen. It's = taken upstream gcc a couple of years to get to the required level of = support. We don't have the manpower to replicate this. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?DB45213A-B039-4BEA-B218-F1199BFC5E36>